Re: What's left over.

Jeff Garzik
2002-10-31T14:20:51Z

Joe Thornber wrote:

>ii) vcalloc, this *didn't* get merged, and will probably end up getting
> moved into dm.h.
>

Yeah, historically we have avoided things like this.

kcalloc gets proposed every year or so too.

>iii) ioctl32 support: people have argued against an ioctl interface,
> and I'm inclined to agree with them, which is why I'm going to
> publish an fs interface shortly. However, given that we are
> currently using an ioctl interface how do we avoid adding support for
> 32bit userland/64 kernel space ? If EVMS isn't touching these
> files does that mean they're not supporting these architectures ?
>
> arch/mips64/kernel/ioctl32.c
> arch/ppc64/kernel/ioctl32.c
> arch/s390x/kernel/ioctl32.c
> arch/sparc64/kernel/ioctl32.c
>
>

Well, I'll note that ALSA compartmentalizes their ioctl32 handling
within their own subsystem, which seems like a decent solution.

That said, [maybe I'm biased <g>], using an fs interface allows one to
completely eliminate an ioctl32 interface. That would be the direction
I would greatly prefer by the time 2.5.x hits the code freeze.

Best regards, and congrats for getting it merged,

Jeff